Evil Avatar  



Go Back   Evil Avatar > Geek Love > Totally Off Topic

» Sponsored Links


» Recent Threads
Destiny 2 Gambit's Free...
Last post by Evil Avatar
Today 08:00 AM
4 Replies, 441 Views
Fantastic Beasts: The...
Last post by Evil Avatar
Today 07:57 AM
2 Replies, 81 Views
Hostile Trailer...
Last post by Evil Avatar
Today 07:53 AM
4 Replies, 94 Views
Jack Black Still has Box...
Last post by Vulture
Today 06:52 AM
8 Replies, 635 Views
Report: Netflix in Talks...
Last post by Chief Smash
Today 06:16 AM
9 Replies, 873 Views
Call of Duty: Black Ops...
Last post by Scherge
Today 02:29 AM
3 Replies, 503 Views
Capcom Shutters Dead...
Last post by SpectralThundr
Yesterday 09:30 PM
9 Replies, 1,175 Views
Devil May Cry 5 has...
Last post by LostToys
Yesterday 06:48 PM
8 Replies, 1,238 Views
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-23-2017, 07:07 PM   #21
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackzc View Post
I care about whats best for everyone.
I'm sure that's the impression everyone has of you in life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackzc View Post
Im not only a racist?
Exactly. Not only a racist, you're a dead branch of the DNA tree, for which humanity thanks you. Useless race-baiting hypocrite who can't even bother to reproduce his own race while bitching about other races.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2017, 07:43 PM   #22
SpectralThundr
Evil Dead
 
SpectralThundr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bawwston
Posts: 7,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackzc View Post
Ohh nigga, you trouble hot.


Debating garbage like this is the reason you are worthless when it comes to politics.
Welcome back Anemonealomadingdong.
SpectralThundr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2017, 08:15 PM   #23
blackzc
Evil Dead
 
blackzc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: I am boot, hear me win!
Posts: 6,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terran View Post
I'm sure that's the impression everyone has of you in life.



Exactly. Not only a racist, you're a dead branch of the DNA tree, for which humanity thanks you. Useless race-baiting hypocrite who can't even bother to reproduce his own race while bitching about other races.

Your using the words race baiting hypocrite unironically. I have nothing left to say to you. Filthy liberal. Are you triggered?
__________________
Nintendo: A guiding light in a sea of video game degeneracy
blackzc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2017, 08:17 PM   #24
blackzc
Evil Dead
 
blackzc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: I am boot, hear me win!
Posts: 6,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpectralThundr View Post
Welcome back Anemonealomadingdong.
Get fucked. Anenome's typography is 1/10 of what mine is.
__________________
Nintendo: A guiding light in a sea of video game degeneracy
blackzc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2017, 08:54 PM   #25
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackzc View Post
Your using the words race baiting hypocrite unironically. I have nothing left to say to you. Filthy liberal. Are you triggered?
Speaking of irony: After you had nothing left to say, you said two more things. Your lack of self-awareness is amusing.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 01:54 AM   #26
SpectralThundr
Evil Dead
 
SpectralThundr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bawwston
Posts: 7,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terran View Post
Speaking of irony: After you had nothing left to say, you said two more things. Your lack of self-awareness is amusing.
Whats more amusing is his often use of applying the liberal label to what are likely the most conservative even almost actual libertarian leaning posters on the entire site. And I don't mean Anenome's brand of authoritarianism type of Ancapistan brand of thinking but actual small, fiscally balanced type of libertarianism, essentially the sane kind.
SpectralThundr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 08:37 AM   #27
VenomUSMC
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackzc View Post
Herpa Derpa Filter.

Your shits all messed up. Back to your cuckshed Johnny American! Buy more guns and store them in your cuckshed! That'll show em!

Them damned ol liberals, dont they know that a man is not supposed ta lay with another man? I aint no rascist, but that just aint rite! Dont tread on me daag nabbit! These colors dont run!

Hitler didn't have kids and neither did Jesus. But please, go on about its the only thing that matters. I've red pilled many many people and got them second guessing the destructive ideas that you cling to. And get ready old man, your kids are going to see you for the fraud you are. They will be closer politically to me than they will be you.

Bank on it.
Who made a claim that something was the "only thing that matters" in here? That was you.

I don't buy that you've "red pilled" people, especially if your delivery echoes the way you push your views here. I'd wager anyone you believe you red pilled was probably already a racist and fully accepting of your racial idiocy, but you've decided that you red pilled them.

Will your children see you for the fraud you are? Oh, right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackzc View Post
You fucking numpty. I never once said everyone that is white needs to go out and have a bunch of fucking kids just because. You cant outbreed 30 million mexicans that have little to no standard of living nor have any shame about mooching off the fucking government. They will breed the country broke soon. Now tell me what good is me having 5 kids going to do. What do i need 5 for? I don't have a fucking farm. You fix the demographics by deporting them...

This isn't a numbers game where who has more wins. White Americans and Europeans along with the Japanese progressed. We are entering a post industrial world and less people are required. This is fine, but the elites don't want this to happen as it would contract the global economy.

You seems to only care about your filthy brood and your family tree. I care about whats best for everyone. I can just as easily call you the parasite queer bait. That shit goes both ways.

Im not only a racist? LOL! Dude, get the fuck outta here with that mess. Tell someone who cares. Liberal scumbag.
According to a few sources, the NYT and PEW in this case, there were about 11.7 million people illegally in the U.S. in 2013 and about 11.1 million people illegally in the U.S. in 2014. For the sake of argument, lets say there are 12 million people illegally in the U.S. currently.

According to National Review:
Quote:
One hundred ten million! That’s how many Americans now live in households that receive some form of means-tested welfare benefit from the federal government. According to a report from the Census Bureau released last week, that’s the highest absolute number in American history, and it represents 35.4 percent of the American population. Think about it — more than one out of every three Americans live in households that are now on welfare. Looked at another way, America’s welfare state now has nearly three times the population of the largest actual state. Because many of these households include more than one person, the number of individual households is smaller, but still a record – roughly 33.5 million, more than a quarter of the country’s households. Worse, 10.5 million households receive benefits from three or more separate programs. While liberals would undoubtedly like to blame this on the bad economy, the welfare rolls have actually grown by nearly 4 million households since the end of the recession. Welfare is rising even as unemployment declines. On the other hand, the growing welfare caseload cannot be blamed solely on President Obama. True, the number of people on welfare has increased by 12.5 million since he took office. But welfare also increased during the Bush administration: The proportion of households receiving SNAP (food stamps), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), or SSI (Supplemental Security Income for the disabled) increased 36 percent during his presidency. And none of these numbers include the middle-class social-welfare programs like Medicare and Social Security. Counting these programs, more than 153 million Americans, nearly half the population (49.5 percent), are living in households now dependent on government for a significant portion of their income.
Deporting people illegally here would reduce the burden -- it would absolutely not fix the economic issue, and would not provide the demographic shift you want.

Now you seem too slow to grasp why you're being labeled a parasite, and that label came from your own idiotic complaints.

According to The American Prospect:
Quote:
So who gets welfare? This is where the race issue enters. Contrary to popular perception, the recipients of TANF are about equally divided between whites, blacks and Hispanics. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, in 2009 the TANF rolls were 31.2 percent white, 33.3 percent black, and 28.8 percent Hispanic. Yet the primary image of a "welfare recipient" in most people's mind is a black woman.
Now if you read the article, you may ask yourself: gee, why are the numbers different? Because different groups will count different programs in which the government transfers some benefit to a family as welfare. Still, based upon the the percentages here, how does that look to you? In the way that many liberals count welfare, in an effort to minimize its cost, black and hispanic Americans make up % that is disproportionate the % those groups represent overall the U.S. population. That is in large part where the views of a black woman being on welfare come from, but the author can't see that he provided evidence for that case. However, if you count welfare the way places like National Review count, you'll see an increase in whites receiving welfare. Why? Because they're counting more programs as welfare that will be seen paying out to whites. What's the point? Your fantasy of deporting non-whites isn't going to solve the economic issues plaguing this country. The only hope your dream has is the deportation of people illegally here, which is facing numerous hurdles, but you have no hope of deporting people legally here -- especially based upon your racist crap.

It's funny that you post about people being "cucks" who just argue things on the internet... as you argue on the internet.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anenome View Post
Many cultures of the world marry girls off after their first menses, around 13 years old. I can't say that's inherently immoral, no.
VenomUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 10:39 AM   #28
blackzc
Evil Dead
 
blackzc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: I am boot, hear me win!
Posts: 6,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by VenomUSMC View Post
Who made a claim that something was the "only thing that matters" in here? That was you.

I don't buy that you've "red pilled" people, especially if your delivery echoes the way you push your views here. I'd wager anyone you believe you red pilled was probably already a racist and fully accepting of your racial idiocy, but you've decided that you red pilled them.

Will your children see you for the fraud you are? Oh, right.

According to a few sources, the NYT and PEW in this case, there were about 11.7 million people illegally in the U.S. in 2013 and about 11.1 million people illegally in the U.S. in 2014. For the sake of argument, lets say there are 12 million people illegally in the U.S. currently.

According to National Review:

Deporting people illegally here would reduce the burden -- it would absolutely not fix the economic issue, and would not provide the demographic shift you want.

Now you seem too slow to grasp why you're being labeled a parasite, and that label came from your own idiotic complaints.

According to The American Prospect: Now if you read the article, you may ask yourself: gee, why are the numbers different? Because different groups will count different programs in which the government transfers some benefit to a family as welfare. Still, based upon the the percentages here, how does that look to you? In the way that many liberals count welfare, in an effort to minimize its cost, black and hispanic Americans make up % that is disproportionate the % those groups represent overall the U.S. population. That is in large part where the views of a black woman being on welfare come from, but the author can't see that he provided evidence for that case. However, if you count welfare the way places like National Review count, you'll see an increase in whites receiving welfare. Why? Because they're counting more programs as welfare that will be seen paying out to whites. What's the point? Your fantasy of deporting non-whites isn't going to solve the economic issues plaguing this country. The only hope your dream has is the deportation of people illegally here, which is facing numerous hurdles, but you have no hope of deporting people legally here -- especially based upon your racist crap.

It's funny that you post about people being "cucks" who just argue things on the internet... as you argue on the internet.
I didn't read any of that. I don't have all day to fuck around with your drawn out shit.

Come back with some to the point bantz or go the fuck away. Merica!
__________________
Nintendo: A guiding light in a sea of video game degeneracy
blackzc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 11:49 AM   #29
Whimbrel
Subhuman
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,847
I mean absolutely no disrespect, and I know that some people took the time to write civil and thoughtful responses, but this thread has taken a strange turn since the last time I was posting and I am not sure I can meaningfully reply at this point without just adding to the confusion. If I picked just one topic to carry forward I would neglect others, but the scope of this seems to be expanding rapidly. Science, global warming, gender identity, gay marriage, guns.....

I would say that the chromosomal basis for gender in humans is well established. I never disputed that. My point was that gender has more dimensions than the simple chromosomal basis. I think this would be true even if we were simple mammals, but when you add in social and historical associations with gender, for humans it becomes and even more complicated issue. So far everyone seems to disagree with me on this, so I won't belabor the point and I will acknowledge that the consensus here is that gender is a one dimensional issue based exclusively on chromosomes, if that is a fair representation of what was being said.
Whimbrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 12:52 PM   #30
blackzc
Evil Dead
 
blackzc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: I am boot, hear me win!
Posts: 6,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by whimbrel View Post
i mean absolutely no disrespect, and i know that some people took the time to write civil and thoughtful responses, but this thread has taken a strange turn since the last time i was posting and i am not sure i can meaningfully reply at this point without just adding to the confusion. If i picked just one topic to carry forward i would neglect others, but the scope of this seems to be expanding rapidly. Science, global warming, gender identity, gay marriage, guns.....

I would say that the chromosomal basis for gender in humans is well established. I never disputed that. My point was that gender has more dimensions than the simple chromosomal basis. I think this would be true even if we were simple mammals, but when you add in social and historical associations with gender, for humans it becomes and even more complicated issue. So far everyone seems to disagree with me on this, so i won't belabor the point and i will acknowledge that the consensus here is that gender is a one dimensional issue based exclusively on chromosomes, if that is a fair representation of what was being said.
hahahahahahaha
__________________
Nintendo: A guiding light in a sea of video game degeneracy
blackzc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 12:52 PM   #31
VenomUSMC
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
I mean absolutely no disrespect, and I know that some people took the time to write civil and thoughtful responses, but this thread has taken a strange turn since the last time I was posting and I am not sure I can meaningfully reply at this point without just adding to the confusion. If I picked just one topic to carry forward I would neglect others, but the scope of this seems to be expanding rapidly. Science, global warming, gender identity, gay marriage, guns.....
All of the arguments remain connected in one way or another was my point of pointing to those issues.

I'll copy and paste the following from my previous post:
Quote:
If a 5ft 8inch woman is 90lbs soaking wet, comes up and tells you she's fat, are you going to pretend she is and recommend that she curb her diet in order to lose weight? What if someone obviously over 30 years old insisted that they're 12 years old, would you pretend they were?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
I would say that the chromosomal basis for gender in humans is well established. I never disputed that. My point was that gender has more dimensions than the simple chromosomal basis. I think this would be true even if we were simple mammals, but when you add in social and historical associations with gender, for humans it becomes and even more complicated issue. So far everyone seems to disagree with me on this, so I won't belabor the point and I will acknowledge that the consensus here is that gender is a one dimensional issue based exclusively on chromosomes, if that is a fair representation of what was being said.
While I understand that a lot is involved with genders outside of a person's chromosomal makeup, chromosomes are the foundation of gender. If you can't change the foundation, all of the other stuff is pretty much fluff in my view.

So, for example, the way men and women dress is, to me, part of culture, history, and often grew as a result of general anatomy differences. If a person wishes to argue that gender is purely (and I'm not implying that this is your argument) a product of society and actually arbitrary, then there should be no such thing as gender.

Hormonal treatment, dressing in a manner normally associated with the other gender, and even surgery doesn't change the foundation.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anenome View Post
Many cultures of the world marry girls off after their first menses, around 13 years old. I can't say that's inherently immoral, no.
VenomUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 01:35 PM   #32
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,715
Whimbrel, progressives are insane on sex identification. It used to be called transsexual and a sex change, because that is what the person is attempting to do (change their chromosomal, biological sexual orientation), but that's a scientific impossibility, so progressives simply changed the verbiage to make the impossible (sex change) possible (gender identification, transgender, etc.). Progressives want these individuals to be treated as if they have had a sex change while hiding the impossibility of it through euphemistic bull about gender identification and the like.

You cannot change your sex. A cancer victim without breasts, a uterus, ovaries, etc. is still a woman. A cancer victim without a penis is still a man. Cutting off, or adding on, parts does not alter REALITY. XX or XY. THAT IS ALL for 99.9% of humanity.

You do not solve a person's psychological disturbances by reorienting society (through altered birth licenses, driver's licenses, etc.) to reinforce the disturbed and incorrect view. This is not an issue of rights, it is an issue of reality. It's so simple a child understands it, so now we have progressives messing up children by allowing five year olds to change their chromosomal sex while calling it 'gender identity.' My GOD, progressives are absolutely insane. Just nuts.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 01:48 PM   #33
blackzc
Evil Dead
 
blackzc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: I am boot, hear me win!
Posts: 6,735
We should see if we cant get EA to change the name of this sub board to (The Cuck Shed)

It can be a place were cucks such as yourselves can come and vent about liberal policy in a civil manner while they totally run roughshot over your shit because unlike you guys they have a set of fucking balls. Which is ironic. MERICA! Guns and tits! No tread!

Later bros, im out again. See in a 6 months, a year whatever. Its genuinely boring here.
__________________
Nintendo: A guiding light in a sea of video game degeneracy
blackzc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 02:10 PM   #34
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackzc View Post
See in a 6 months, a year whatever.
Procreate or GTFO. lol@u.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 02:14 PM   #35
Whimbrel
Subhuman
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,847
I'm not trying to say that these ideas and perspectives aren't related, just that it makes discussing them sequentially really challenging. If I get 6 replies from 6 different people on 6 different topics after the first post, that just tends to expand geometrically down the thread. In any case, I'll tackle both Vanum and Teran's replies at the same time here and with all due respect (which I'm assuming is minimum ) I will ignore blackzc's contributions.

So, really quickly, what does it mean to be transgendered? I'm not, and I don't know that much about it, so, I'm mostly guessing here. Secondly, I completely disagree with most of the overly generalized statements about what liberals think, but I'm only one and I can't speak for everybody.

Having said that, it seems to me that being transgendered is NOT an attempt to change ones chromosomes, "because that is what the person is attempting to do (change their chromosomal, biological sexual orientation), but that's a scientific impossibility" - Terran, but that it is about how one presents and is responded to on a cultural level. In many cases, there is no attempt to change anatomy even.

However, regardless of what we decide or disagree with about what transgender means, so what. My biggest reaction to this is not that we disagree about transgender, although we certainly do, but that I can not understand why people who are not transgender even care about this at all. How is this an issue? Why even care about it? Are there thousands of transgender people harrassing you all the time every day? Seriously, when was the last time either of you had to interact with somebody who was transgender in any way whatsoever that caused any problem, inconvenience, challenge, etc. that you had to deal with any more than having to accommodate fellow human beings on a daily basis in all of our lives sharing public areas in our society?

If it wasn't this week, then why is this even on your radar? I'm not saying that you should capitulate and say, oh, ok, you win if it isn't an immediate situation. I'm just trying to figure out why this has anything to do with anything? I mean, it seems to me that the number of transgender people has to be pretty small to begin with, and the number of bathroom molestations by transgender people is pretty low compared to heterosexual molestations or homosexual bathroom molestations, one local example of which was so horrifying that I still have trouble letting my son go to the bathroom when I can't keep an eye on the door in public areas. So, maybe we can start there?

and, at risk of causing problems for myself downstream, let me just ask WTF on this one...."With the LGBTQA community, it wasn't long ago that it was essentially sold as "once gay marriage is passed, we're happy." Okay, but did that happen? No. Then it quickly morphed into demanding that people pretend there is no issue with those suffering and believing themselves to be transgender." There is a huge difference between what you see here and what I see. Most of it has to do with the idea that a community of individuals can be summed up by some idea that is considered what they are sold by. Of course that is going to be incorrect. You show me where the whole community of L, G, B, T, Q, A people said "All we want is this one thing, and after that we will never have any other human desires" It's absolutely absurd. There are too many generalizations, characterizations, and shortcuts to even make sense of that. These are people and individuals, not a monolithic entity, certainly not one whose identity and agenda is accurately defined by those opposed to it.
Whimbrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2017, 06:09 PM   #36
VenomUSMC
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
So, really quickly, what does it mean to be transgendered? I'm not, and I don't know that much about it, so, I'm mostly guessing here. Secondly, I completely disagree with most of the overly generalized statements about what liberals think, but I'm only one and I can't speak for everybody.
As I understand it, and this was as explained to me by someone believing themselves to be transgendered, being transgendered person means that you're fully and completely a woman/man if you believe you're a woman/man.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
Having said that, it seems to me that being transgendered is NOT an attempt to change ones chromosomes, "because that is what the person is attempting to do (change their chromosomal, biological sexual orientation), but that's a scientific impossibility" - Terran, but that it is about how one presents and is responded to on a cultural level. In many cases, there is no attempt to change anatomy even.
I believe it's an attempt to change the result of one's chromosomal makeup in any way possible. If they could change their chromosomes, they would -- it's just not possible as far as we know. It's not merely about changing how gender is presented culturally, it's about pretending that their chromosomes aren't what they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
However, regardless of what we decide or disagree with about what transgender means, so what. My biggest reaction to this is not that we disagree about transgender, although we certainly do, but that I can not understand why people who are not transgender even care about this at all. How is this an issue? Why even care about it? Are there thousands of transgender people harrassing you all the time every day? Seriously, when was the last time either of you had to interact with somebody who was transgender in any way whatsoever that caused any problem, inconvenience, challenge, etc. that you had to deal with any more than having to accommodate fellow human beings on a daily basis in all of our lives sharing public areas in our society?
People who are not transgender care about this because they're forced - yes, forced - to play along with it. People lose their jobs over not playing along. And by not playing along, I'm not referring to people bullying transgendered individuals. I've seen the hammer come down on people, especially those in the government, for not using the pronoun of the week. As Pacer pointed out, albeit with a different but related situation, people have lost their businesses over not wanting to get involved. So, how many times have I had to deal with a transgendered person that caused problems? Personally and anecdotally, on a fairly regular basis (think once a week or so). At work, we had a blowup over [strike]Bradley[/i] Chelsea Manning. The advocates, many of whom aren't even transgender but some are, were getting people in trouble for referring to Manning as Manning and avoiding pronouns or his first name.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
If it wasn't this week, then why is this even on your radar? I'm not saying that you should capitulate and say, oh, ok, you win if it isn't an immediate situation. I'm just trying to figure out why this has anything to do with anything? I mean, it seems to me that the number of transgender people has to be pretty small to begin with, and the number of bathroom molestations by transgender people is pretty low compared to heterosexual molestations or homosexual bathroom molestations, one local example of which was so horrifying that I still have trouble letting my son go to the bathroom when I can't keep an eye on the door in public areas. So, maybe we can start there?
It has. And if it wasn't on my radar this week. This will ultimately grow, just as with gay marriage, where people will be forced by to play along or lose their very livelihoods over it under the force of government.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
and, at risk of causing problems for myself downstream, let me just ask WTF on this one...."With the LGBTQA community, it wasn't long ago that it was essentially sold as "once gay marriage is passed, we're happy." Okay, but did that happen? No. Then it quickly morphed into demanding that people pretend there is no issue with those suffering and believing themselves to be transgender." There is a huge difference between what you see here and what I see. Most of it has to do with the idea that a community of individuals can be summed up by some idea that is considered what they are sold by. Of course that is going to be incorrect. You show me where the whole community of L, G, B, T, Q, A people said "All we want is this one thing, and after that we will never have any other human desires" It's absolutely absurd. There are too many generalizations, characterizations, and shortcuts to even make sense of that. These are people and individuals, not a monolithic entity, certainly not one whose identity and agenda is accurately defined by those opposed to it.
When you reference a group, you're going to deal in generalizations -- otherwise, you can't talk about the group. In fact, your very first post came with broad generalizations on groups and entire generations of people. The LGBTQA group is often seen pushing all of this, and it was a general theme that once gay marriage was legalized, that it would lead to a general happy "we got what we want" feeling from that group. It immediately lead to gay/lesbian individuals seeking out businesses that to force their will upon.

Also, you never answered this:
Quote:
If a 5ft 8inch woman is 90lbs soaking wet, comes up and tells you she's fat, are you going to pretend she is and recommend that she curb her diet in order to lose weight? What if someone obviously over 30 years old insisted that they're 12 years old, would you pretend they were?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anenome View Post
Many cultures of the world marry girls off after their first menses, around 13 years old. I can't say that's inherently immoral, no.
VenomUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2017, 06:38 AM   #37
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by VenomUSMC View Post
Also, you never answered this:

Quote:
If a 5ft 8inch woman is 90lbs soaking wet, comes up and tells you she's fat, are you going to pretend she is and recommend that she curb her diet in order to lose weight? What if someone obviously over 30 years old insisted that they're 12 years old, would you pretend they were?
Want to see a progressive's head explode? Ask him/her why gender is a social construct (transsexualism) open to interpretation and individual choice, but race is not (aka: Rachel Dolezal); they're fine with changing your sex like you change your clothes, but at best conflicted and at worst in open internecine warfare over opting into or out of a racial category.

Sit back and watch the hilarity ensue.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2017, 09:47 AM   #38
PacerDawn
Choadwanger
 
PacerDawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
I will ignore blackzc's contributions.
And your life will be better for it, trust me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
So, really quickly, what does it mean to be transgendered? I'm not, and I don't know that much about it, so, I'm mostly guessing here.
Transgenderism is a mental illness called "Gender Identity Disorder" (GID). Basically, someone with GID has great discomfort with their currently body (penis or vagina), so much so that they are in constant distress about it. Basically, they think they are one sex, but when they look down they see the opposite one. They have great urges to change their body to be the other sex.

The current "preferred" treatment that is acceptance, but that only partially works. It is impossible for a person to change their body completely to the other sex (they can never produce sperm or bear children) so there will always be a level of discomfort. The best that can be done through acceptance is making them feel as comfortable as possible, even if this means making non-transgenders uncomfortable. And that still won't help them most of the time.

Here's a question: If I told you a person looked in the mirror and hated the way their body looked, so much so that they would take extreme measures to change it, would you consider that normal? Would you say that acceptance and encouragement was a good cure? Think about that for a second and I'll come back.

More recently, the left has been pushing this condition as "Gender Dysphoria" so that people with the condition will not have to suffer the stigma of being considered mentally ill. Basically, the term GID hurt their feelings so they changed it. The irony there is that, by NOT classifying it as a mental illness, they are saying that Transgenderism is a choice (as is homosexuality). By being a choice, that removes certain discrimination protections that they would be afforded were it classified as an illness. Of course, they want the protections anyway.

Oh, by the way, that question I asked earlier? I was talking about Anorexia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
Secondly, I completely disagree with most of the overly generalized statements about what liberals think, but I'm only one and I can't speak for everybody.
True, but you have to admit it is the majority or the most vocal. It's hard not to generalize when all you hear from a side is one thing. That happens to the right all the time, it's just human nature. For example, do you not like conservatives? If not, why? Name any reason, and you will be generalizing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
Having said that, it seems to me that being transgendered is NOT an attempt to change ones chromosomes, "because that is what the person is attempting to do (change their chromosomal, biological sexual orientation), but that's a scientific impossibility" - Terran, but that it is about how one presents and is responded to on a cultural level. In many cases, there is no attempt to change anatomy even.
Actually, that appears not to be the case. What you just described is something different. According to this page:

Quote:
Gender dysphoria is not the same as gender nonconformity, which refers to behaviors not matching the gender norms or stereotypes of the gender assigned at birth. Examples of gender nonconformity (also referred to as gender expansiveness or gender creativity) include girls behaving and dressing in ways more socially expected of boys or occasional cross-dressing in adult men. Gender nonconformity is not a mental disorder.
That last bit is debatable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
My biggest reaction to this is not that we disagree about transgender, although we certainly do, but that I can not understand why people who are not transgender even care about this at all. How is this an issue? Why even care about it?
The issue looks different depending on which side of the fence you stand on. The left sees the issue as being "They don't want you to use their bathrooms." Or they don't see it as an issue because "Why don't you care if a man goes to the bathroom in the ladies room?". For the right, the issue is "They want to force themselves into your bathroom, and you don't get a say in it." Or they don't see it as an issue because "Why can't they just go to the bathroom of their birth sex?"

Personally, I don't care if some dude thinks he's a girl. However, I don't want my 11 year old daughter sharing a locker room that guy. My daughter doesn't want to either. But we are being told we have to. The problem is that we are being forced to accept transgenderism as normal, or we are called bigots. And I don't want my kids being taught (in public school) that it's normal either. Hence, issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
I mean, it seems to me that the number of transgender people has to be pretty small to begin with, and the number of bathroom molestations by transgender people is pretty low compared to heterosexual molestations or homosexual bathroom molestations
I hear this argument (or rather those like it) all the time, that we shouldn't be using molestation as an argument because molesters don't adhere to laws and they are going to do it anyway. And that's absolutely true, they don't and they will. But think of it this way. Today, if a man walks into the girls locker room/bathroom, we KNOW that guy is a pervert. I would argue that there is less chance of someone doing it if there are people standing around and that person could get caught.

Now imagine a world where it's perfectly OK for a man to go into the girls room. Is that man a pervert, or is he really transgender? We don't know, and since it's legal he is welcome to stroll right on in there. Do you really think people won't take advantage of this?

And, regardless, do women still want a man in their room? Well too bad if they don't. Apparently it's better to make real women uncomfortable, than to have to make special accommodations for a trans. And there we come to another big issue:

A man is uncomfortable with going to the men's room because that man thinks he is a woman. Solution, let that man go to the women's room where is is comfortable.

A woman is uncomfortable with a man going into the women's room, even if that man thinks he is a woman. Solution, stop being a bigot and accept that man in your bathroom.

One sided perhaps? I'd say yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
...let me just ask WTF on this one...."With the LGBTQA community, it wasn't long ago that it was essentially sold as "once gay marriage is passed, we're happy." Okay, but did that happen? No...." [...] You show me where the whole community of L, G, B, T, Q, A people said "All we want is this one thing, and after that we will never have any other human desires" It's absolutely absurd.
The main argument was “How is gay marriage going to affect you?” As in, it's not going to affect those that are against it. In fact, it's that same argument that you are using with regards to transgenderism. You are asking why we care, how does it affect us? That's exactly what was said during the push for Gay marriage, with the implication that it wouldn't impact those that didn't support it. And yet it did.
__________________
The last time someone slipped viagra in my drink, I found out the hard way.

Last edited by PacerDawn; 04-26-2017 at 08:23 AM..
PacerDawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2017, 09:49 AM   #39
PacerDawn
Choadwanger
 
PacerDawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terran View Post
Want to see a progressive's head explode? Ask him/her why gender is a social construct (transsexualism) open to interpretation and individual choice, but race is not (aka: Rachel Dolezal); they're fine with changing your sex like you change your clothes, but at best conflicted and at worst in open internecine warfare over opting into or out of a racial category.
I would actually argue that race is MORE a social construct than gender is. Yet which one is identity change accepted and which one is not?

Strange indeed.
__________________
The last time someone slipped viagra in my drink, I found out the hard way.
PacerDawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2017, 09:54 AM   #40
PacerDawn
Choadwanger
 
PacerDawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by VenomUSMC View Post
At work, we had a blowup over Bradley Chelsea Manning. The advocates, many of whom aren't even transgender but some are, were getting people in trouble for referring to Manning as Manning and avoiding pronouns or his first name.
I find this especially amusing since, in the military, people are typically referred to by their last name only.

How dare they refer to a military person by their last name! That's bigoted! Watch for changes coming to the local military near you soon!
__________________
The last time someone slipped viagra in my drink, I found out the hard way.
PacerDawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:25 AM.